The Rose Hive Method Again....Yawn???

[fiat500bee]

Having read all of the posts in the main discussion thread in the "Beehives" section I get the feeling that these hives are often considered by new beekeepers who obviously don't have the benefit of experience. Conversely, new bks. do have the benefit of being reasonably objective because of that lack of experience.

I am one of those new bks. and I have been reading and watching everything beekeeping-related on the internet for the last month. Having stumbled on Tim Rowe's video and explanations I wonder how many people are actually aware of his system in detail; because although many people are aware that he uses slightly different hive bodies, I feel that Tim is "selling" a system rather than a hive. In places there is an inference that he is re-inventing the wheel and his is a vanity project.

It appears to be about letting the bees have more freedom to do their activities in the way they would do in the wild; and after all, as many people remind me when discussing bees, bees are not domesticated creatures.

Another big feature of Tim's system is that a QE. is not used at all. I know that must lead to some messy frames of honey but according to the system, once the hive is asufficiently big stack the bees tend to store honey alone in any case.

Tim also does no feeding; I don't yet know his approach to pest and disease control.

He claims to have excellent results when measured in honey production and this is in Ireland with a cool damp climate which he says is getting damper.

His system creates a lot of bees and this seems to be one of his aims in keeping bees. He talks about creating genetic diversity by enabling a lot of reproduction and natural behaviour which encourages natural selection. I can already see that this goes counter to many of the traditional aims in beekeeping, which like most farming activities aims to work animal behaviour to suit human needs.

I am very much drawn to his system; not because I am a tree-hugger or have some anthropomorphic idea that the bees would be happier, but because I think I would find out more about bee behaviour and have more bees.

I'm wondering if anyone here has really gone with this method and had any success or if anyone has adapted some of Tim's ideas to a more conventional setup....particularly the one about not using a queen-excluder?

I've seen some very aggressive responses elsewhere on this forum. Whilst any response would be welcome I am particularly keen to see ones which come with a reasoned argument in either direction.

 

[drdrday]

I haven't read much about Rose Hives, but I do know that there are quite a few on this forum who don't use queen excluders at all. They aren't needed in any hive, no matter what type of hive they use. It's just that some beekeepers prefer to use them.
I know that Rose Hives uses boxes of the same dimensions throughout, as both brood boxes and supers. But traditional deep boxes don't have to be used as brood boxes, and traditional shallow boxes don't have to be used just as supers. I imagine that in a hive without a queen excluder, the bees will simply use whichever size box happens to be where they want the brood to be or the stores to be. The designation is only in the beekeeper's head, so other than the ability to move frames of the same dimensions anywhere within the hive, I'm not sure how much difference the same size boxes actually makes to the bees.

 

[fiat500bee]

The designation is only in the beekeeper's head, so other than the ability to move frames of the same dimensions anywhere within the hive, I'm not sure how much difference the same size boxes actually makes to the bees.

Thank-you for that helpful reply. I think the "same sized" boxes is probably the least important aspect of the method and does divert from the basic principles of his approach being understood by some people. I had assumed that queen excluders were used almost exclusively in modern beekeeping so now feel less inhibited from omitting one.

Tim Rowe is trying to modify bee behaviour as little as possible and effectively aiming for a complete bees' nest in as natural a shape as possible within the confines of his boxes. Ultimately, a successful colony would occupy a tower of boxes as a vertically placed oval, with no box being specifically brood or honey except as decided by the bees.

I think that is what has prompted his thought that why should the boxes be different sizes; brood is a bit big for lifting high and supers would possible create too many "slices" in the nest, so he's gone half way.

In his videos I think some of his "towers" are somewhat risky and even a bit ridiculous. He has possibly taken the "purity" of his theory a bit far. But a lot of what he says is very convincing and clearly based on many years of studying bee behaviour.

 

[Hebeegeebee]

The size of the box is mainly for our own convenience of lifting and yes you could use a couple of shallow boxes for brood - although I think Brother Adam suggested that one big box works better than a couple of smaller ones as the queen's laying is not restricted/compromised. Maybe the Rose hive just need to be one big brood box? (Which would be no fun as it's been done before and it wouldn't be a Rose any more).

Similarly an excluder is there for our convenience and for effective management although we are "taught" to smoke the bees at the entrance before we go in. That drives the bees UP, and then we take the roof off and then smoke them to drive them back DOWN again! Without a queen excluder, the queen would be 'encouraged' to move up away from the smoke and potentially go into the honey-storage area above the brood where she would be difficult to find if a queen excluder was not present to stop her.

An old beekeeper once told me to just to stroke the hive and speak to them to let them know you're coming in.

 

[drdrday]

I think the "same sized" boxes is probably the least important aspect of the method and does divert from the basic principles of his approach

Yes, I don't know if I'm missing something important in his approach, but to me it always just reads as though he's simply running a hive without a queen excluder. I can't think off hand now who on the forum does and doesn't use a queen excluder but I've read enough on here over the last couple of years to know that there are quite a few that simply don't use them.

Personally, as a beginner, I like the extra little bit of control that I feel using a QE. It keeps my supers simply as stores only, and it also means that I have a rough idea of where the queen is. But I'd certainly be interested in doing a comparison in future (when I'm more confident) without a QE just to see how it works for me.

What size boxes to use is always your own option. There is nothing to stop them being completely interchangeable around your hive. It doesn't matter to the bees, just to the beekeeper that has to lift them or rearrange frames in them from time to time. So, as you say, using a 'medium' size box throughout that isn't too heavy to lift off as a 'super', is a compromise that some might want to adopt.

 

[TryingToLetThemBee]

@Finman calls them "honey excluders" and he's probably right, but they do make life simpler. The bigger price is they MUST contribute to swarming impulse. Starting out with the minimum (please) 2 colonies, you could run one without for a while to learn. Once the honey arch is in place it will do the job unless you mismanage the hive (eg Rose-like, you should add space below so the brood nest and honey arch move downwards over time: a booming flow would be an exception but that is a couple of weeks a year). If it is just friends and family honey initially (and quietly, even if it is not), extracting ex brood cells is no issue.

On the one-size issue. I have come to see the advantages of 14x12 where obviously it's no go. But one size obviously has advantages. The way I have run everything is on all National deeps ("brood" size), usually overwintering on double brood and Demareeing in spring. It sort of depends how old you are; getting a full "brood" box off the top of a 7 "brood" box stack, as I was doing 2 years ago (not sadly this year or last) is an effort. And it is a complication in extraction.

If you are older, one of our senior Association members used a system of only "super" - shallow - Nationals that looked really appealing, with 3 layers below a QE. I think it's kicking around the internet too.

I wouldn't worry about the "horizontal lines" argument: seems irrelevant if the bee spaces are right: my bees certainly seem to ignore them and - HUGE ADVANTAGE that just occurred to me - swarm inspections at this time of the year are just a matter of tipping the top box so you can see if the play cups that are always there are being acted on. Supersedure cells are a different matter, so you should keep an eye open, but if you are rushed it is a big advantage over 14x12 unless you have been forced to give the latter extra space, as I was with one colony I have been helping out with this year.

On your point "I've seen some very aggressive responses elsewhere on this forum", after some unpleasantness and a general feeling from the many that the few should behave, we are doing a lot better...

Good luck

PS: try and avoid smoke. If you have a colony that you can't handle* with only the minimum, to get them off lugs etc, call @.Hivemaker for a Q (or me: all mine are now descended from one of his...)

*on a number of occasions: everyone is allowed the odd off day.

 

[Mint Bee]

For most purposes, it doesn’t matter what you keep your bees in, its far more important to learn how to keep the bees fit and health. From that perspective it is normally easier to work with a local club, or mentor, and in the first instance have equipment compatible to theirs. Once you have some experience in manipulation, swarm control and disease recognition / treatment, you can then you can transfer bees into whatever you chose.

I looked at either a TBH or Rose style hive set up when I started contemplating keeping bees some 15 years ago. I’m grateful that I was convinced to try a more conventional approach first – I’ve no particular axe to grind against any type of hive or bee; what matters most is keeping responsibly and with respect for others

 

[Murox]

The methodology does have much to commend it. The idea of using the same size of frame and box throughout the hive does have advantages, and some folks do just that. The use of queen excluders has always been optional, as has using one or more brood boxes. There are of course many systems/ways of keeping/hiving bees that are popular in other parts of the world that do not necessarily conform to the ways many UK keepers use.
Have a think about horizontal hives of all sorts and various frame sizes like the narrower but deep frames of the German Einraumbeute or the bigger deep frames of Georges de Layens.

Until around 1814, bee colonies, whether wild or under human stewardship, built themselves a set of combs entirely according to their own design in whatever cavity they could find or was provided by the beekeeper. No restriction was placed on the way the colony used these combs in their activities of brood rearing and food storage. With the introduction of the moveable frame hive, followed quickly by the invention of wax foundation and the queen excluder, everything changed. Its probably fair to say that Langstroth's hive began the industrialisation of the honeybee. Although Langstroth's made a successful top-opening hive with movable frames it was also a direct descendant of Dzierżon's hive designs.

 

[Madge]

Same-size Boxes isn’t an idea exclusive to Rose hives - what is new about his hives is that they’re based on a National hive, and uses a new size for the boxes somewhere in-between National deeps and shallows. I think the frame size is good for a one-box system.

His system isn’t new either, and can be used in any hive - but he explains it very well.

The only thing I don’t like about Rose hives is the materials used to construct the boxes, being plywood on two sides. If they were polystyrene boxes, they’d be great.

 

[ericbeaumont]

The only thing I don’t like about Rose hives is the materials used to construct the boxes, being plywood on two sides. If they were polystyrene boxes, they’d be great.

I agree.

Tim Rose chose that size of box because it was big enough for him to handle alone. A DN National box is hard work to shift.

 

[bingevader]

We haven't used QEs on the Nationals or WBC for a few years now.
We've stuck with the supers, because they are lighter and easier to extract.
We only feed if a colony is starving, they get left a super of honey.
We don't get brood in the supers, because they are supers!
They are added on top as the colony descends back into the brood box in the spring and removed at the end of the summer.

I've Warre hives at home, which I suppose are similar to the Rose hive method.
All the boxes are the same size, no QE and boxes are nadired.
I run them fairly traditionally, as I still inspect, treat and manage for swarms.

 

[pargyle]

There are always these deliberations when you start beekeeping and I was no exception. What you need to decide is what your objectives/limiations in keeping bees are and the decisions will follow ..

1. If you are of slight build or infirm in any way then there are limitations about the box size you will be able to lift. Any size box full of honey or brood is heavy check what the weight you can comfortably lift - in front of you with arms extended and at chest height (the worst case scenario). From there you will find box size an easy decision.

2. If you have any back problems and find any size box heavy - consider alternative hive formats - such as a Dartington or Long hive where you will only have to lift single frames.

3. If you can then stick with a recognised and regularly uses format - the more popular formats in the UK are National or it's big brother 14 x 12. Kit for regular used formats is much cheaper than lesser used sizes.

4. Giving the bees a 'natural' environment is a much hackneyed premise in beekeeping - the reality is that all honey bees are wild - where they live and what beekeepers do with them does not have to be un-natural. There are zealots on all the extremities of beekeeping who will purport that 'their' way is the only way .. ignore the extremes and find 'your way'.

I keep bees in Paynes Poly hives -14x12's, I don't use queen excluders - it's really not a problem - yes you occasionally get a queen who will lay in a super but the brood eventually emerges and they use the cells to store honey. Clearly I don't extract when there is any brood left in a frame.

I don't use foundation - I allow the bees to build their own comb. It takes a little extra management but I like the fact that bees have built what they want to build.

I try and avoid feeding my bees.. I allow them to fill the brood box with honey towards the end of the season and they will, largely, overwinter on their own honey. I top up with syrup if any colony looks a little light by the time they stop foraging.

Swarm control is essential if you don't want to either lose all your bees and/or annoy your neighbours so inspection for this and disease is essential - although I only inspect when there is a need and only as far as I need to. The less I disturb my bees the better they seem to thrive.

Varroa .. varroa is a pest - I don't treat for varroa but it's not a course that I would recommend - there is enough for a beginner to contend with without risking your bees succumbing to varroa. There is more to not treating than just not treating.

So.. I take a honey crop and I consider that I look after my bees responsibly .. the clap trap put forward by some so called 'natural beekeepers' please treat with some degree of scepticism. The boxes you put your bees in or the 'system' you follow is what you decide it is.

 

[gmonag]

Like any different system, The Rose Hive Method has advantages and disadvantages when compared with "conventional" beekeeping. When I started beekeeping I did my research and decided to go with Tim Rowe's system (Rose Hive = Rowe's Hive, geddit?).

I have found it works very well for me, and that is all that matters. It is not about the box size at all. He just happens to have designed a wooden box that works because he is a carpenter and an inventor. The system will work with ANY size box. It is the management method that counts. I would encourage people to read his book and watch his videos and perhaps give it a go. You may be surprised.

Oh and definately not "Yawn"

 

[fiat500bee]

I would encourage people to read his book and watch his videos and perhaps give it a go. You may be surprised.

Thank-you and to the many others who have all given constructive comments....I certainly will be following Tim's philosophy although possibly just using the boxes I have (a complete BS) and supplementing next year with aditional brood-boxes or supers.

I am going to buy the book although Tim has shared his wisdom through videos etc. sufficient to get the gist.

I guess this will be a go it alone project with little likelihood of a mentor, as it seems not many people practise the technique in full detail, but that suits me fine. .

Oh and definately not "Yawn"

The "Yawn" isn't mine....I could discuss this all day, but it was an attempt to defuse any disinterested naysayers.

 

[thorn]

A friend's son's wife was going to take up beekeeping and bought a rose hive. She left her husband before getting any bees, and left the hive behind. The son keeps saying he'll bring to to my apiary. When (if) it finally arrives I'll be interested in trying it out, and wil be searching this forum for advice.

 

[pargyle]

I am going to buy the book although Tim has shared his wisdom through videos etc. sufficient to get the gist.

I guess this will be a go it alone project with little likelihood of a mentor, as it seems not many people practise the technique in full detail, but that suits me fine. .

Roger gives a very balanced view of the Rose Hive in the Dave Cushman website:

http://www.dave-cushman.net/bee/rosehive.html

just be careful ...there's a lot to learn in beekeeping and the first couple of years are a very steep learning curve. You will find more people able to advise with a more conventional approach in the early years. Whilst not wishing to discourage you from an unconventional format - I've been there and it is sometimes a lonely path to tread.

 

[For want of a better word]

I have one large apiary site with 20+ OSB hives and a half dozen or so OSB nucs
No queen excluders
Only Cornish Native Black bees
Produces more honey than any of my other apiaries.. year on year.
Rarely need to use the smoker.
Feed 2:1 / Invert for winter as with any other colony that has had its honey stores stolen away!
Bought the Rose hives as a "bundle" with Cornish Black bees some years ago from a couple who were fed up with the UK and all the Brexit hullabaloo.. and are now living happily in France, keeping French Amm in Langstroths!

Choice is yours?
Chons da

 

[gmonag]

Whilst not wishing to discourage you from an unconventional format

Not really that unconventional

 

[pargyle]

Not really that unconventional

It was not meant as anything other than a warning that, when you follow the Rose Method with a Rose hive .. you are working with frame sizes and boxes that are not conventional in the UK. Only Thornes sell the kit and it's more expensive than more regularly used formats.

https://www.thorne.co.uk/index.php?route=product/search&filter_name=rose+hive

There is nobody less conventional in their beekeeping than me .. I would actively encourage people to experiment with different hive formats - but do it having got some more mainstream (if that word is more acceptable) beekeeping under your belt.

 

[Newbeeneil]

I was determined to start a rose hive this year based on supers. It was based on the fact that I would be using standard equipment and if it didn't work out I could use the boxes and frames in my "conventional" beekeeping.
Unfortunately I never picked up the nice strong swarm this year that I wanted to populate the hive. (I did pick up some strong swarms but they were all into bait hives and onto standard brood frames)
I think I'll try again next year.